US plan to leave INF treaty 'extremely dangerous’: Analyst

Washington’s plan to withdraw from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF) and to test new long-range ballistic and cruise missiles in violation of the pact is “extremely dangerous” and “destabilizing,” says former US Senate policy adviser and diplomat.

A senior Pentagon official, who declined to be named, said Wednesday that the US military aims to test a ground-launched cruise missile with a range of about 1,000 km (620 miles) in August.

The official said the United States was also looking to test an intermediate-range ballistic missile in November, adding that both would be conventional and not nuclear.

The INF treaty, negotiated in 1987 by then-President Ronald Reagan and former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, required the US and Russia to destroy ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles with ranges of between 500 and 5,500 km (310 to 3,420 miles).

“It is hard to overstate how destabilizing this is given the very short flight time missiles in this range have towards their targets,” said James Jatras, a specialist in international relations.

“Given how rapidly the United States is moving to test and deploy such weapons, one can only surmise that the accusations against the Russia side really had very little to do with whether or not the Russians really were in violation of the treaty,” Jatras told Press TV on Thursday.

“Unfortunately, this fits into a much larger pattern of pushing Russia’s security interests to the margins,” he added.

Last month, the administration of US President Donald Trump threatened to withdraw from the INF treaty in six months unless Moscow ends what Washington says are violations of the 1987 pact.

Russia announced it was suspending the treaty. Moscow denies flouting the accord and has accused Washington of breaking the accord itself, allegations rejected by the United States.

The United Nations has urged the United States and Russia to preserve the treaty, saying its loss would make the world more insecure and unstable.

US arms control advocates as well as congressional Democrats have questioned the decision to leave INF. Washington has a long track record of tying major weapons upgrade plans to an external threat in order to convince American taxpayers.